Interesting article on the LA Times front page this morning about a doctor in Fresno, CA who treats JWs without blood.  He only promises to repect their wishes, not that they won't die.  JW patients flock to him from all over the world.  Heartbreaking because many still die needlessly, especially those with leukemia for which blood transfusions are a standard part of their care.   

http://www.latimes.com/health/la-me-jehovahs-20120202,0,1225354.story

But what is the view on stem cell transplants. An article in awake seems to be against them.

So it's really nice that this Dr accomodates JW's in risking their life, to show respect for life.

He is probably charging them a fortune...

Some jws docs will tell you to wait for the new system.  

He is probably charging them a fortune...

It actually is considered a lucrative niche market.  I was told that by a physician at the Cleveland Clinic

JW's advancing the science of blood less treatments one dead body at a time.

Check out this article called,

Things I Learned From Calling the Watchtower Society

Randy

(@ DNCall:  iPad?  Click the "HTML" icon.  Write replay and upload.  It will go to the "Post a reply" box, then submit.  I also start with the HTML box, even one word, then upload and complete the reply, and it works. xx)

Oops!  Sorry.  Meant "write reply and upload."

You know what I can't understand.  They prohibit blood, but will allow a bone marrow transplant.  I didn't need this type of treatment for my leukemia, but I checked.  Now they have to kill your own bone marrow in order to make your body ready to accept foreign bone marrow.  Which means you may not be able to make blood for a while while the transplant takes.  That of course increases the need for transfusions.  It just never made sense---unless they look at it as Jews were allowed to eat the marrow.  Which I'm sure they do, but it still highlights how ridiculous it is. It's an imaginary, and arbitray line they draw. 

NC

They really should give the members the right to choose, based on their concience.

forgot about the marrow, good point

I submitted a letter to the editor of the LA Times in response to this article.  I doubt that it will be published, so here it is for you:

Kudos to Dr. Michael Lill for providing treatment to Jehovah’s Witnesses despite the fact that he is, as described by Ms. Gorman, “a committed atheist who views [their] belief system as wholly irrational.” 

Having been a member of the Witness religion for over 50 years, I do, however, take exception to Ms. Gorman’s use of the terms “biblically centered” and “literal interpretation of the Bible” when referring to the Witnesses’ belief regarding blood.

The following is a literal interpretation of what the Bible says about blood:  When God first allowed Man to kill animals for food, the animal’s blood was to be removed so as not to be eaten.  It was to be poured out on the ground.  By doing so, Man would be showing proper respect for the sacredness of the animal’s life, in God’s eyes. 

Jehovah’s Witnesses go far beyond a “literal interpretation of the Bible” when they say that this rule covers blood transfusions.  Blood transfusions do not involve the taking of a life, as in the case of killing animals for food.  Blood transfusions do not violate the sacredness of life.  In fact, they are, in countless cases, the only way to preserve life.  

Why do the Witnesses believe this way?  It is not because they are “biblically centered.”  It is to add to their list of beliefs that make them unique among myriad Bible-based religions, thus bolstering the claim that their organization alone is the true religion.  It is a case of being organization-centered not biblically centered.

Frank Kavelin
Santa Monica, California 

ya never know.

I just made a comment on that news site today.  Shows 171 commenters there now.  Do you sometimes make comments on news articles like this if available?  I actually sent a 'thank you' to Dr. Lill.

Good letter DNC.

How many jws know they can have a stem cell transplant?